Research that crosses the traditional boundaries of academic branches, and the boundaries between academia, industry and government are increasingly widespread, and sometimes significant new branches have begun. But Munther Dahle, Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Consumer of Computer at MIT, says that such multidisciplinary and interconnections often suffer from many defects and disabilities compared to more traditional disciplinary work.
But, more and more, it says, in the modern world we faced – climate change, biodiversity loss, how to control and regulate artificial intelligence systems, and the identity and control of epidemics – are needed from very different fields, including engineering, policy, economics and data analysis. The realization is that, a decade ago, in the formation of data, systems and society (IDSS) for the leading organization of MIT, aimed at forming a standing set of unified and cooperative than the usual temporary and ad -hoc associations for such work.
Dahle has now written a book in detail the process of imagining a way to analyze the existing disciplinary landscape in MIT and to bring this new organization, to imagine a way of making some obstacles a permanent and meaningful way. Cambridge University Press this March this March “Data, Systems and Society: Harnessing AI for Social Good” Book, Book, Book, Book, Book, Book, Book, Book, “
“The book is his effort,” describing our thinking leads us to the vision of the organization. What was the driving vision behind it, “says Dahleh. That says, it is done with many different audience, but in particular, “I am targeting students coming to research that they want to overcome different types of social challenges, but I am using AI and Data Vision. How should they think of these problems?”
One of the main concepts that guided the organization’s design is something they refer to as a “triangle”. This refers to the interaction of three components: physical systems, people communicate with those physical systems, and then regulation and policy regarding those systems. This is affected by everyone, and affected by others, explains. “You get a complex interaction between these three components, and then there is data on all these pieces. The data is like a circle that sits in the middle of this triangle and attaches all these pieces,” he says.
When facing a big, complex problem, it suggests that it is useful to think in terms of this triangle. “If you are facing a social problem, it is very important to understand the impact of your compromise on the role of people in society, people and in the success of your system.” Often, he says, “Solutions and technology have really marginalized some groups of people and ignored them. So a big message is always thinking about the interaction between these elements because you think about how to solve problems.”
For a special example, it quotes the Kovid -19 epidemic. It says it was an excellent example of a major social problem, and explains the three sides of the triangle: there is a living; There was a little realized and subjected to intensive research efforts; There was an infectious effect, with people to do with social behavior and interactions; And there was a decision by political leaders and institutions, in terms of closure of schools and companies or the need for masks, etc. He says, “The complex problem we faced was the interaction of all these components, while the data was not all available.”
Decisions, for example, had an immediate impact on schools or businesses, economics and social well -being and health and education on the basis of controlling the spread of the disease, “so we had to give all these things back into the formula,” he says. “During the epidemic the triangle came to us.” As a result, IDSS “became a conveying place, partly. Because of all different aspects of the problem we were interested.”
He says examples of such interaction, he says. Social media and e-CE Mars platforms are “systems made for people, and they have regulated aspects, and if you are trying to understand the misconduct or misinformation, they fit into the same story.”
The book presents many examples of moral issues in AI, asserting that they should be very careful. He quoted self-driving cars for example, where programming decisions may appear moral in dangerous situations but lead to negative economic and humanitarian consequences. For example, when most Americans support the idea that someone should sacrifice his driver instead of killing an innocent person, they will not buy such a car. This reluctantly reduces adoption rate and eventually increases casualties.
In the book, it explains the difference, as it sees, between the “transdisciplinary” opposite the concept of typical cross-discipline or interstable research. “They all have different roles, and they have been successful in different ways,” he says. The key is that most such efforts are transient, and it can limit their social impact. The fact is that even if people from different sections work together on projects, they lack shared journals, conferences, common spaces and structural facilities, and formation of the spirit of the community. Creating an academic entity in the form of IDS that clearly and permanently crossed these boundaries was an attempt to overcome the lack. “It was mainly about creating a culture of thinking about all these elements at the same time for people.”
It hurrys to add such interactions to MIT of course, “But we didn’t have a place where all the students are interacting with all these principles at the same time.” In the IDSS Doctoral Program, for example, there are 12 required main courses – half of them figures and Optim ptimization theory and counting and social exemptions .No and half of humanity.
Dahleh left the IDSS leadership to return to education two years ago and to continue his research. But as he reflects his role in bringing the function of that organization and bringing it into existence, he realized that unlike his own educational research, in which each step is carefully documented in published papers, “I left a trail” to document the creation of the organization and the thinking behind it. “We have thought about what we have thought, no one knows how we made it.” Now, with this book, they do.
He says, “The book,” all of this leads to how this all came together.
